Extreme Tennis Academy

They say :

Extreme Tennis Professional training is a world renown high performance center with an unparalleled reputation for excellence. Our small scaled program has been responsible for the success of many Professional, junior, and college players and aspiring professionals around the world. Headed by Diego Dominguez who has worked and helped develop more top players in USA and around the world than most academies in 14 years of experience, a proof of great results that sets Extreme Tennis Academy apart from the rest.

The Players:
They have an impressive list of past and present players, they are a little bit undefined about what is the bottom line of the age group that they accept. It's impressive that students come from more then 20 different countries.

Their Credo:

" We are not a factory, we are not a Resort, at Extreme Tennis Academy we develop Tennis Champions"

I say:

It's refreshing to see a Tennis Academy from Florida that is not led by over 70 years old "Guru" who knows everything. Also it's nice to know that this Academy is not "living in the 80's" where resorts were ruling the world of wannabe tennis players. However their co- director Giorgio Carneade claims that he was involved in developiing Serena and Venus Williams which makes me really tired. I have now counted all coaches and Managers who were involved in Serena and Venus' life and their years spent with them. So I have come to the "revelation" that Serena and Venus are training for at least 80 years respectively.

Their name "Extreme Tennis" is a little bit extreme but once that you hit the homepage of their website and hear their horrendous music and see the photos of the people involved you realise that they are desperate to be funky or edgy? I'm not sure which one!

They really don't have to do that because their good work speaks for itself.

Is that the Zoolander School of Tennis? You are right about the name dropping with their website. They coached a person who knew the grandmother of a friend who once passed Sampras in the mall parking lot. Geez........ The only guy I knew was Rudy Rake. Maybe if I bleach my hair and wear some hemp/shell necklaces, I could coach there...........

] However their co- director Giorgio Carneade claims that he was involved in developiing Serena and Venus Williams which makes me really tired. I have now counted all coaches and Managers who were involved in Serena and Venus' life and their years spent with them. So I have come to the "revelation" that Serena and Venus are training for at least 80 years respectively.

I cannot understand how so many tennis people like to take credit for something they never done.This is present on any level of tennis play.

There are some tennis coaches who write in their resume that they coached somebody whom they never saw in their life.
All Russians who came in my country at the beginning of 90&#168;s said that they coached Medvedev;it does not matter whether according to their age was even theoreticaly possible.There is saying,"Lie repeated many times becomes truth."

I really hate this because I think that coaching is very honored and difficult job and as such should be treated.People (coaches) should be recognized by their deeds not words.

When you catch somobody braging about something he/she neved did the best answer is to turn away.

] However their co- director Giorgio Carneade claims that he was involved in developiing Serena and Venus Williams which makes me really tired. I have now counted all coaches and Managers who were involved in Serena and Venus' life and their years spent with them. So I have come to the "revelation" that Serena and Venus are training for at least 80 years respectively.

I cannot understand how so many tennis people like to take credit for something they never done.This is present on any level of tennis play.

There are some tennis coaches who write in their resume that they coached somebody whom they never saw in their life.
All Russians who came in my country at the beginning of 90Ęs said that they coached Medvedev;it does not matter whether according to their age was even theoreticaly possible.There is saying,"Lie repeated many times becomes truth."

I really hate this because I think that coaching is very honored and difficult job and as such should be treated.People (coaches) should be recognized by their deeds not words.

When you catch somobody braging about something he/she neved did the best answer is to turn away.

Hey Bubo, where are you from? I am interested as I may know some players from your home country.

Is that the Zoolander School of Tennis? You are right about the name dropping with their website. They coached a person who knew the grandmother of a friend who once passed Sampras in the mall parking lot. Geez........ The only guy I knew was Rudy Rake. Maybe if I bleach my hair and wear some hemp/shell necklaces, I could coach there...........

It does not matter the age of the tennis coach;the only things which matters is how close to their capacity he can bring players.

Every tennis coach who improves players performance is success.This may seem as something quite normal.Why in the world would you go to a tennis coach if he/she cannot improve your performance.In many instances not that coach does not improve player&#168;s performance, but player is worse than before or even quit tennis completely.This scenario is unfortunately very often.

Very good coaches are the ones who improve their players performance time after time.To do that one has to be very knowledgeable, and be able to use this knowledge in practical way because with every player is different problem so in many situation coach has new issues to deal with.This is only possible if a coach is very educated in tennis technique and tactics , sport sciences(physiology, psychology padagody, nutrition, injury prevention, physical conditioning etc.), and is able to apply this knowledge in praxis.

There are very few coaches who posses these qualities.To acquire them one must study different segments of tennis game (ongoing education), and experience to be able to use theoretical knowledge in praxys.For all this, time is needed so it is not usual to see young quality tennis coach.Tennis coach are compared by improvements of their players not how hard they are able to hit the ball.

So one should never misunderstood tennis coach for hitting partner.Tennis coah job is intelectual:he has to diagnose a problem, prescribe medecine, implement this medicine, and see the results of action, and base on it make necessary adjustments.Tennis coach bear all responsibility.Hiting partner is physically imvolved.He is not there to think, but to implement orders in a way to help the player he is hitting against.

It does not matter the age of the tennis coach;the only things which matters is how close to their capacity he can bring players.

Every tennis coach who improves players performance is success.This may seem as something quite normal.Why in the world would you go to a tennis coach if he/she cannot improve your performance.In many instances not that coach does not improve player&#168;s performance, but player is worse than before or even quit tennis completely.This scenario is unfortunately very often.

Very good coaches are the ones who improve their players performance time after time.To do that one has to be very knowledgeable, and be able to use this knowledge in practical way because with every player is different problem so in many situation coach has new issues to deal with.This is only possible if a coach is very educated in tennis technique and tactics , sport sciences(physiology, psychology padagody, nutrition, injury prevention, physical conditioning etc.), and is able to apply this knowledge in praxis.

There are very few coaches who posses these qualities.To acquire them one must study different segments of tennis game (ongoing education), and experience to be able to use theoretical knowledge in praxys.For all this, time is needed so it is not usual to see young quality tennis coach.Tennis coach are compared by improvements of their players not how hard they are able to hit the ball.

So one should never misunderstood tennis coach for hitting partner.Tennis coah job is intelectual:he has to diagnose a problem, prescribe medecine, implement this medicine, and see the results of action, and base on it make necessary adjustments.Tennis coach bear all responsibility.Hiting partner is physically imvolved.He is not there to think, but to implement orders in a way to help the player he is hitting against.

Good point to a degree. However, the biggest problem I have with all of this coaching talk is that the player must learn to think for him or herself. The coach is not out there playing. There are a lot of coaches out there who really don't know the game of tennis and talk a big game. Talk is cheap. You have to understand the high level of tennis that is being played. A coach can't just talk about doing this and that. He must understand it. As a hitting partner and a coach, I can account for that. Sampras used a high level coach in Wilkerson and later Annacone. Both coaches and hitting partners. Higueras did the same with Courier. They were high level players who had similar traits to their players. Both of Sampras' coaches had similar styles to Sampras and had played professionally. Same with Higueras and Courier. Agassi didn't break through big time until he had Brad Gilbert. Also a former pro who was able to hit with Agassi. I think it takes a mixture of both. By the way, don't think that Nick Bollettieri can't get out there and hit. He can. He did for years. So can "Red" Ayme. Tony Roche was the same way. Talking is great, but you have to have been there to take someone else down that road. The only coach I knew that couldn't get out there and hit with his player was Thomas Muster's coach. To be a great coach, you can't just be a hitter, but at the same time, you can't just be a talker either.

Good point to a degree. However, the biggest problem I have with all of this coaching talk is that the player must learn to think for him or herself.

Coaching a tennis player from the start to as close as possible to his/her potential is a long process.As player matures as a person coach has to adapt his style of coaching.At the beginning a coach is authority per se, and later on the authority is built on knowledge and behaviour.

As player goes through phases of having fun, learning tennis, playing tennis and winning tennis so does coach/player relationship go through certain phases.At highest levels they are partners who openly discuss all issues.Normaly , this is not going to come all of the sudden.What one as a coach does early on, so one has to build on.

So, the player will think for himself (take full responsibility for his actions) if his coach was developing him not only physically, game wise, but as human being as well.
Unfortunately, there are were very few coaches who are willing and able to do it because:

- they do not have this kind of knowledge and experience
- they are too self centered so they think that they are the most important.They cannot see their players surpass them

To conclude:

A coach keep his player in the dark for two reason:

- out of fear because of lack of knowledge
- out of personal problem.Coach thinks that he is above his player.

Good coaches has very strong ego (as well as good players), but coach must understand that he is here because of player, and bringing a player as close as possible to his natural abilities, and at the same help him to develop in healty human being is his most valuable inner reward.

Coaching a tennis player from the start to as close as possible to his/her potential is a long process.As player matures as a person coach has to adapt his style of coaching.At the beginning a coach is authority per se, and later on the authority is built on knowledge and behaviour.

As player goes through phases of having fun, learning tennis, playing tennis and winning tennis so does coach/player relationship go through certain phases.At highest levels they are partners who openly discuss all issues.Normaly , this is not going to come all of the sudden.What one as a coach does early on, so one has to build on.

So, the player will think for himself (take full responsibility for his actions) if his coach was developing him not only physically, game wise, but as human being as well.
Unfortunately, there are were very few coaches who are willing and able to do it because:

- they do not have this kind of knowledge and experience
- they are too self centered so they think that they are the most important.They cannot see their players surpass them

To conclude:

A coach keep his player in the dark for two reason:

- out of fear because of lack of knowledge
- out of personal problem.Coach thinks that he is above his player.

Good coaches has very strong ego (as well as good players), but coach must understand that he is here because of player, and bringing a player as close as possible to his natural abilities, and at the same help him to develop in healty human being is his most valuable inner reward.

Correct. You are spot on with your assessment. I have seen many coaches who really think they are the center of the world. That is what I mean by training the player to think for him/her self. Coaches should suggest things with a smile and then ask the player what he or she thinks. Let them learn to coach themselves. They have to in a match. They are the only ones out there. Coaches who are too controlling lose all credibility with a player when they tell their player they must do this and then they do it and the player still loses. I have found in my time that working scenarios with players and then asking them what they think the best thing to do is is the best thing to do. That way when they are in a tough match, they can think for themselves in any situation. It's called maturing as a player. Learning to think for oneself on the court is really the key to the maturation of a player. Jose Higueras was the greatest at this. He didn't tell Courier what to do. He made suggestions and then allowed Courier to make decisions. When Courier lost, he blamed himself and didn't make excuses or look to blame his coach. He knew the final decision on the court was his own. I never once saw Courier look up into the stands and have that "what do I do" look. They worked on situations in practice and Higueras gave suggestions (not orders) and when Courier came across situations in matches, he used his head and played according to what he thought was best as they had worked on every situation possible in practice. Higueras was/is a class act and one of the best coaches ever in my opinion.

There are a lot of coaches out there who really don't know the game of tennis and talk a big game. Talk is cheap. You have to understand the high level of tennis that is being played. A coach can't just talk about doing this and that. He must understand it.

This is what I am saying for long time.There is huge difference between quality coaches and the ones who call themselves coaches.Quality coaches do understand the essence of tennis and can bring a player close to his/her potential.The other group does not.How can one teach, coach something to somebody if one does not understand himself.That is the reason that there are just very few quality coaches like just very few quality players.

A coach can't just talk about doing this and that. He must understand it. As a hitting partner and a coach, I can account for that.

It must be drawn distinction between hitting partner and a tennis coach.I talked about it before, but I will say again.Hitting partner is physical job, and a coach is intellectual job.Hitting partner has to be good tennis player (so that he/she can control and place a ball where he/she is told).Tennis coach is intellectual job.Except being knowledgeable in tennis technique, and tactics, he has to be knowledgeable in sport science (biomechanics, physical conditioning, physiology, psychology, nutrition, injury prevention, pedagogy etc).Except that tennis coach has to have general education (foreign language, decisions in everyday situations not stricly related to tennis), leadership (tennis coach is the main person who leads this project of nurrturing a child to professional tennis), excellent teaching skills, and at the same time he has to psychologist to his player.

To illustrate difference between tennis coach, and a hitting parner I will use formula 1 car racing as an example.Here hitting partner is a person who changes tires or refill gasoline, and a tennis coach is director of a racing team who organize and lead whole operation.

Sampras used a high level coach in Wilkerson and later Annacone. Both coaches and hitting partners. Higueras did the same with Courier. They were high level players who had similar traits to their players. Both of Sampras' coaches had similar styles to Sampras and had played professionally. Same with Higueras and Courier. Agassi didn't break through big time until he had Brad Gilbert. Also a former pro who was able to hit with Agassi. I think it takes a mixture of both. By the way, don't think that Nick Bollettieri can't get out there and hit. He can. He did for years. So can "Red" Ayme. Tony Roche was the same way. Talking is great, but you have to have been there to take someone else down that road. The only coach I knew that couldn't get out there and hit with his player was Thomas Muster's coach. To be a great coach, you can't just be a hitter, but at the same time, you can't just be a talker either.

In my thread professional coaching I stated to be former very good tennis player is prerequisite (the other conditions being the same) for being high level tennis coach.

I do not agree with you when you call these coaches the hitting partners.They all were former world class players, and as such they can hit well, but they are not hitting partners.They are high level tennis coaches.All these players besides them had hitting partners.

As I said tennis coach has to be former very good tennis player;one of the reason is that he can hit with his player, but not to be hitting partner.Coach hits with his players in following cases:

- when he teaches them new tennis stroke (menthal and practice stage if)
- by beiing en face with your player coach can notice better how his player plays tactically and technically
- to warm up his player before a match (in special situations)
- while on the road and there is nobody to hit against

In all the other cases is unproductive;being otherwise all these coaches would not coach their players, but would rather play on the tour.

In my thread professional coaching I stated to be former very good tennis player is prerequisite (the other conditions being the same) for being high level tennis coach.

I do not agree with you when you call these coaches the hitting partners.They all were former world class players, and as such they can hit well, but they are not hitting partners.They are high level tennis coaches.All these players besides them had hitting partners.

As I said tennis coach has to be former very good tennis player;one of the reason is that he can hit with his player, but not to be hitting partner.Coach hits with his players in following cases:

- when he teaches them new tennis stroke (menthal and practice stage if)
- by beiing en face with your player coach can notice better how his player plays tactically and technically
- to warm up his player before a match (in special situations)
- while on the road and there is nobody to hit against

In all the other cases is unproductive;being otherwise all these coaches would not coach their players, but would rather play on the tour.

I guess we all have our different opinions. I can still hit with the tour players and coach them at the same time. My level of tennis got that high. So did Higueras, Annacone, Gilbert, Bruguera, Meligini, Cahill. So the way one coach works it isn't always the way another one works it. I prefer to coach both ways. By being on the other side of the net and then being on the same side of the net as well. It has just worked best for me and the players I have worked with. There is no one set way to get a player to the top. It isn't up to the coach, it's up to the player. Ask Federer, he has no coach. He's tried it three times and he lets them go after a short time. It just doesn't work for him. As for Sharapova, she needs someone to tell her when to breathe and chew her food. It all depends on the player. I know and have coached players that wouldn't have even stepped on the court with me if I hadn't had a world ranking. It was a prerequisite for them. At the same time, there are players who could not care less if their coach played. It just kind of has to fit the player. Neither one of us is wrong in this situation. It's kind of what makes tennis such a neat game.........

In my thread professional coaching I stated to be former very good tennis player is prerequisite (the other conditions being the same) for being high level tennis coach.

I do not agree with you when you call these coaches the hitting partners.They all were former world class players, and as such they can hit well, but they are not hitting partners.They are high level tennis coaches.All these players besides them had hitting partners.

As I said tennis coach has to be former very good tennis player;one of the reason is that he can hit with his player, but not to be hitting partner.Coach hits with his players in following cases:

- when he teaches them new tennis stroke (menthal and practice stage if)
- by beiing en face with your player coach can notice better how his player plays tactically and technically
- to warm up his player before a match (in special situations)
- while on the road and there is nobody to hit against

In all the other cases is unproductive;being otherwise all these coaches would not coach their players, but would rather play on the tour.

I will support my point by giving few examples.

To my daughter besides being a father, coach, I was hitting partner, driver, conditioning coach, psychologist, nutricionist, masseur etc.This is exception which just confirms the rule.I did all that because I had tremendous drive to bring her to professional tennis on one hand, and I did not have money to pay all that on the other hand.To try to bring someone to professional tennis this way minimizes his/her chances and produces additional stress .

In normal situation I would stay her tennis coach, but all other posts would be filled with adequate people.
I could hit with my daughter when she was young, or I was teaching her new strokes or improving old ones, but under normal conditions would be very inefficient that coach is a hitting partner too.Tennis coach is the head of operation, and as such he has enough to do.Being a hitting partner would make him more innenficient coach because he would use his energy on hitting with a player instead being concentrated on coaching duties.

I started with my daughter when she was 6 year old so I could hit with her for long time.At the moment when she could beat me , I would hit with her because I did not have other choice (I organized sparring matches, and paid hitting partners, but latter was on and off), or I would like to feel first hand how she reacts in certain situation, or when I would teach her new stroke or improve the old one.

Many times because I had no other choice I would do certain drills with her, that is work on automatic stage.That was innefective twofold:

- for me:I would get very tired, and my knees would hurt me, and in last period my wrist because her ball was too fast for me, and I was late hitting the ball (no bandage would help)

- for her:my ball was too slow so she was hurting too because she did not get the ball she had to face on pro tour.

So, there is clear distinction between tennis coach, and hitting partner.This does not mean tha coach does not hit with his/her player, but doing it on daily basis is inneffective for both:tennis player and tennis coach.

Tennis coach is a head of operation and he could hit with his player sporadically.It would be very innefficient and innefective that he does job of a hitting partner on daily basis even if he could.On the other hand hitting partner is not qualified to be a tennis coach.

To my daughter besides being a father, coach, I was hitting partner, driver, conditioning coach, psychologist, nutricionist masseur etc.This is exception which just confirm the rule.

You confirmed my point when you said you were her hitting partner and coach. A coach needs to be able to do all of these things or I don't really consider them a coach. I never gave massages, but the rest was just part of the job. That is why I had an issue with all of these parents calling themselves coaches. I never said that you weren't as you play the game. A parent can be a great coach, but many of them either don't know the game or are not about the player, but about themselves. That is a problem with many of the academies. If they were truly about the player improving, the money would come regardless. There would be no need for lies or false promises. Most parents can see when the coach is putting forth effort and caring about their child. They tend to be willing to pay for it when they know the real effort is there. Obviously you have seen some troubled academies in your time as have many of the parents on here. The best thing to do is to scout them out personally and identify a coach that you would like for your child to work with. I'm sure Extreme has some good coaches, but I have to laugh at the Zoolander like model faces being put on by the head guy on their website. Is there a catwalk leading to their courts where he does runway modeling? That would be a different twist! Extreme Modeling and Tennis Academy!

Sampras used a high level coach in Wilkerson and later Annacone. Both coaches and hitting partners. Higueras did the same with Courier. They were high level players who had similar traits to their players. Both of Sampras' coaches had similar styles to Sampras and had played professionally. Same with Higueras and Courier. Agassi didn't break through big time until he had Brad Gilbert. Also a former pro who was able to hit with Agassi. I think it takes a mixture of both. By the way, don't think that Nick Bollettieri can't get out there and hit. He can. He did for years. So can "Red" Ayme. Tony Roche was the same way. Talking is great, but you have to have been there to take someone else down that road. The only coach I knew that couldn't get out there and hit with his player was Thomas Muster's coach. To be a great coach, you can't just be a hitter, but at the same time, you can't just be a talker either.

To continue to prove my point about necessary distinction between tennis coach and hitting partner.By this I do not want to minimize the role of hitting partner, but to put role of each in proper perspective.As I said tennis coach is the director of operation, and hitting partner is one of operatives.Hitting partner has certain role which nobody else cannot accomplish but good hitting partner.

I will support this by an example.
In 1975 my country played in Davis Cup against Soviet Union.National tennis federation was in bad shape as is today so players who pllayed for Davis Cup had to organize their own practice for match against Soviet Union.In the club where I played was one of the player.He organized his practice by taking three of young boys for hitting sessions.One was in the morning, I was at noon, and one was in the afternoon.He told us what to do, and we would do it.We were hitting partners.With each of us he would stay on the court for 1.5 hours each day.This was going for two weeks.The name of the player is Boro Jovanovic (number 8 ranked professional at the time, and Wimbledon double finalist).
The weather was hot, but I was in good shape because I paid very much attention to my physical conditioning, and Boro Jovanovic passed his prime (36 years old at the time).During my first practice session 11.30 - 13:00h I felt very weak (it was sunny day, and to mee everything became dark), and I told him that I have to go to bathroom.I did not have to go to bathroom, I went to bar and ordered water, limon, and sugar to try to recover.I could not so he came to see what I am doing so long in bathroom.
Each new day I felt better and better.What happened first day ? My CR (control rating )was way below his;in plain English his ball was too fast for me.Even three of us were good young tennis players we were not adequate hitting partners to Boro Jovanovic although he was not in his prime time.So, he did not have adequate preparation for Davis Cup.On the other hand, I was from day to day adapting more and more to his ball speed so after 14 days being as hitting partner I played tournament , and bit a player who till then bit me every time.This time his ball seemed somehow slow to me.

What this example illustrates?As coach has to be qualified to coach so hitting partner has to have quality to be hitting partner to someone.In other words what I am saying is that the coaches cannot be hitting partners to their world class players because they do not have CR which correspodents to CR of their players.If these two do not match then this is waste of time;the same as being coached by so called coach.

So high class tennis coaches (Annacone, Gilbert, Roche, Higueras etc.) are not hitting partners, but coaches who are able to hit because they used to be world class tennis players.They are not hitting partners because their ball is much slower than ball on the pro tour.The main reason for that is that they are not in physical shape they used to be, and tennis is very physical sport.If it would be otherwise they would not coach, but play.

Can anyone imagine Tony Roche hitting on daily basis against Ivan Lendl or Roger Federer?He would have to leave a tennis court using walking stick, and still the players would not benefit from his sacrifice.So he was not their hitting partner, but their tennis coach.

For example,Sampras as young player was Lendl&#168;s hitting partner at one time or another.This is how it works.